- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:04:22 +0100
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Cc: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 2010-09-29, at 18:55, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > On 9/29/2010 1:42 PM, Alexandre Passant wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm checking current issues in the Update doc, and see that ISSUE-37 is closed. >> >> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects >> + >> ACTION: paul to add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update (ACTION-289) >> >> Do Paul or anyone remind what we meant by "feedback effects" here ? >> Seems to relate to atomicity ? > > The use case in question involved using SERVICE in the WHERE clause of an update operation, I believe. That's correct. Different levels of atomicity could lead different stores to return different results. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Thursday, 30 September 2010 07:05:29 UTC